>
> > that shouldn't be there. The story-telling aspects are burdened
with
> > this peculiar gambling game that isn't obvious and doesn't help
the
> > players or the GM focus on what is actually happening in the
game world.
>
> This is what a couple of my current players found. I was a player
with
> them but sort of 'got it' towards the end of the HW game that one of
> my friends was GMing. Suddenly understanding what the AP mechanic
was
> there for, I used it to help accentuate my descriptions of what I
was
> doing. When I wanted to bid high and take more risks I pushed it
with
> the description of what I was attempting. Something had to 'click'
(or
> is that 'snap'?) before I switched from my RQ mentality over to the
> more abstract view of an exciting combat sequence. It stayed
exciting
> for me.
Its worth searching back for Greg's extract of how he plans to describe the bidding process in the next few books out, essentially the player describes the action and the narrator suggests the level of AP bid that this implies. So the more ambitious the described action the higher the AP.
>
> > 1) You are not supposed to tell players what their state of
wounds are
> > until the end of any combat.
>
> All abstracted, I agree. I've developed a 'feel the blood' variant
> that gets round this, but wonder if I'm therefore missing the point.
>
I've moved towards subjective descriptions, it may be hard to know at the time if you are short of breath because the blow winded you or because it punctured a lung and you are drowning in your own blood.
> > 2) There is no real means of changing tactics during a combat
because
> > your pool of APs is based upon the skill you started with. (As
far as I
> > can tell.)
>
> I think here that the switching of skill may force the opponent to
> switch to an alternative defensive skill which they are,
potentially,
> crap at.
Absolutely, this is also one of the most overlooked aspects of missile fire. If you start out with missile fire then your opponent trying to use Close Combat has a real problem, unless they happen to be using a pavis to hide behind they are going to be at a severe improvisational penalty. Blocking arrows with swords is ludicrously hard.
>Although your AP total is based on the first skill you try,
> you may find the contest swings your way as you outwit your opponent
> by going for one of his weaknesses. That's the theory. It would have
> to work for me in the narrative flow, and I probably won't be able
to
> conceive this working until I actually GM the game!
>
The only examples I can recall were using a Feat mid-combat where the reduced (default 14) resistance made a difference. Oh and missile combat!
> > 3) The AP mechanic simply doesn't work with missile combat. At
all. I
> > fire some arrows at my enemy and because I miss my range of
possible
> > actions is reduced when he gets to me? I can even be 'defeated'
because
> > I started out shooting at him before he reached me? Why?
>
> Because from the musical score and a number of well judged camera
> angles, you've given the audience the impression your a bit crap.
See above, you should not be losing unless your opponent is set up to defeat archers or you are very unlucky or outclassed. Running out of AP against a charging opponent simply reflects the fact that you left it too late to pull out your close combat weapons, easily done.
If you are using missile fire to try to defeat your opponent remember at all times that they must use an appropriate ability to resist, no Close Combat (Greatsword) is not appropriate and would incur a really nasty improvisational penalty. On their action they should still use an appropriate ability (Run in Armor or Charge perhaps) whilst you can still use Ranged Combat as pincushioning them still achieves your aim (although Run is an option to re-open the range).
If you are using missile fire *with the intention* of switching to close combat then it should perhaps be resolved as an augment to your close combat ability - this is how I would usually resolve javelins thrown during a charge for example.
Alternatively if you are standing well outside the combat you could use your archery as an unrelated action, I'd allow an attack as a simple contested action for the usual 3AP. An opponent could still charge you and you would have to resist their charge with your ability to pin them down with missile-fire as above.
>
> And also to the others of you that have played or GMed HW: have you
> found the AP mechanics to be a useful way of measuring the eb and
flow
> of combat in a fun supportive way?
>
Yes for major and significant combats; the sort of thing that in a Errol Flynn movie would have him fighting from room to room, swinging from half a dozen chandaliers/tapestries and fighting across at least one banqueting table. Initially we over-used them and I think that was a mistake.
-- Nic
Powered by hypermail